Civilization is only for casuals and new gamers?!

[Arwon]

I can see an argument that Civ would be more diverse and interesting if it carried less of a teleological and Whiggish view of history, but I don't think that's this

Side note, what would a Marxist or cyclical version of Civ look like

 

[Akka]

And complexity is often seen as adding more things to simulate and pay attention to, same as some of the Paradox games.

Honestly, I think this is actually the main beef I have with all of their games : they start with a vision, and then are being bloated over time, adding plenty of new systems which hardly feel cohesive and end up making the whole a weird mess.

 

[warpus]

Honestly, I think this is actually the main beef I have with all of their games : they start with a vision, and then are being bloated over time, adding plenty of new systems which hardly feel cohesive and end up making the whole a weird mess.

I don't mind it because I don't follow their release schedule or whatever. I'll just randomly buy their games and DLC and play it, so I almost never notice features stacked on top of features stacked on top of features. I just see it as a game I don't know all the ins and outs of, and hey let's invade Pommerania.

 

[civvver]

I didn't play civ6 so can't say, but faction diversity is not what made civ5 casual. It's the lack of options, everything is just a store points for this reward- religion, science, culture, they're all just buckets you press enter to fill and eventually get something with.

Civ4 was much more dynamic decision making with tradeoffs for everything.

 

[warpus]

Civ4: BTS was def. the best Civ game ever. I like civ 6 but I don't like the spammy settler thing you always gotta do

 

[MaryKB]

I still enjoy Civilization 5 most of all, but mostly because I'm not an expandionist (I love playing as Venice!) and I enjoyed having smaller armies and going for diplomatic victories. Well unless you count Colonization as a Civilization game, then I say that one's my favorite ever (original, not Civilization 4 version), because even as you have a simple goal I just loved how everything worked. I sort of hated how I had to even declare independence, I would've just gone on playing like that forever if I could, but you sort of get pushed into it too much. I have very fond memories of my colonies with schools and everything, and how my sister and I used to play cooperatively (she'd take the soldier, I'd have the pioneer, and we'd spend our starting gold on an extra ship so she and I would each have our own)

I definitely don't enjoy other Civilization-type games, except I used to love Birth of the Federation, but for others I find they're just too confusing and difficult for me to play. But I'm probably what you'd call a "casual gamer", so I'm probably not a very good example against this lol. But even if Civilization is accessible for people like myself, I don't see what's wrong with that? I mean at least you have modding tools you can use if you want to make things radically different if you're an expert player, right?

 

[Synobun]

I definitely don't enjoy other Civilization-type games, except I used to love Birth of the Federation.

 

[MaryKB]

Ooooh you also played? I used to love playing as the Federation with "Many" minor races. My only complaint would be you can only win by domination, so I had no option really for playing peacefully unless I didn't care about winning, I wish you could have a diplomatic victory or something, right?

 

[Moriarte]

There is an element of art required when making these games. Sometimes, when you mix he numbers right, the game becomes infinitely replayable. But one can’t reasonably expect every painting coming out of the master’s workshop be the masterpiece.

 

[Akka]

I don't mind it because I don't follow their release schedule or whatever. I'll just randomly buy their games and DLC and play it, so I almost never notice features stacked on top of features stacked on top of features. I just see it as a game I don't know all the ins and outs of, and hey let's invade Pommerania.

Well, it's actually hard to not notice. The main problem is precisely that all these systems live side by side but not together (the said lack of cohesive design). Maybe I'm especially sensitive to this (I find the layers in current WoW too noticeable also).

 

[warpus]

I'm saying it's hard to notice if you load up the game once a year.

I've liked most of the paradox DLC I bought, but like I said I play the game so infrequently that each time I load it up not really sure what to expect.

 

[HoloDoc]

I must admit, I have become far less enamoured of Civ as I get older. I used to play it religiously, dating all the way back to the original. Then occasionally. Then I didn't play for years, before firing up BTS last year out of the blue. Whole reason I started lurking here, matter of fact. I quit playing again after a few weeks, because I just don't find it as fun as I used to. Part of that is the simplicity, and part of it is just a lack of motivation; I've won it many times before, I can usually tell if I'm going to win by Year 0, and I'm just not motivated enough to ekkeep playing beyond that. I could g up a difficulty setting, but at the higher levels it's as much mathematical as it is creative, and I'm playing games to relax, not for the challenge like some.

Same reason I gave up on EUIII; I just don't want to micromanage like that, and even if I did, I don't have that sort of spare time. I can steamroll mofos as England or France or Austria, but I just don't have the patience to play as anyone else for long.

So I guess I'm not casual enough for Civ, but too casual for Paradox? My gaming life sounds like my love life, when you put it that way.

 

[Lexicus]

My gaming life sounds like my love life, when you put it that way.

hoo boy *pulls collar nervously*

 

[HoloDoc]

hoo boy *pulls collar nervously*

Hey, at least I don't play with a joystick.

 

[Broken_Erika]

eeeeEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeewwwww! Gross!

 

[MaryKB]

Why would you play Civilization with a joystick? I'm afraid I don't understand, I imagine you'd have much more difficulty than if you're using a mouse?

 

[HoloDoc]

Why would you play Civilization with a joystick? I'm afraid I don't understand, I imagine you'd have much more difficulty than if you're using a mouse?

I think you missed that we were comparing my gaming to my sex life. Neither one of which is working out for me these days.

 

[mitsho]

Getting back, it's a really interesting question what a more Marxist or cyclical Civ would look like. Can't put an answer to it really outside of that the victory conditions wouldn't be put at the end, but more f. e. based on each era by itself.

I still believe Civ is for most people (= those not on this forum) an empire building game like Civ or Anno, not a competitive 4x game or a boardgame like Civ6 was designed for. It's about creating something awe-inspiring, which yes, makes it theoretically more for casuals (but the bad UI and the excessive micro-management kills that at the moment unfortunately).

 

[HoloDoc]

Wouldn't a Marxist Civ be a game where you win by having your own people overthrow you after a violent revolution?

 

[warpus]

The original Civilization was based on a board game. The series has always been board-gamey to me